I was born in Poonch (Kashmir) and now I live in Norway. I oppose war and violence and am a firm believer in the peaceful co-existence of all nations and peoples. In my academic work I have tried to espouse the cause of the weak and the oppressed in a world dominated by power politics, misleading propaganda and violations of basic human rights. I also believe that all conscious members of society have a moral duty to stand for and further the cause of peace and human rights throughout the world.

Thursday, November 20, 2014

The Guardian’s Misleading Editorial

Nasir Khan, November 20, 2014

The Guardian’s editorial on 18 November 2014 (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/18/guardian-view-on-jerusalem-killings)
deals with the violent killing of four Israeli worshippers at a
synagogue in a Jerusalem neighbourhood on Tuesday 18th November 2014. On
hearing the news the PA President Mahmud Abbas condemned this act of
violence by two Palestinians, who were immediately killed by the Israeli
police. The American rulers and media condemned these brutal killings
vociferously. But as far as I am concerned I have always condemned and
opposed any acts of violence against anyone because all bloodshed is
wrong, unacceptable and indefensible no matter who the perpetrators of
such crimes are, Israelis, Palestinians or someone else.

In the last two short paragraphs of the editorial, the editor raised
fair questions about the policies of the Netanyahu government. But the
editor’s portrayal of the gory acts in the first three paragraphs is
much flawed and misleading. If the writer has some inkling of the forces
that created Israel, not as espoused by the hasbara, but by historians
of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict then he would have seen and wrote
about them otherwise.

However, it is quite common to see amateur journalists who can easily
skip facts to push a story on their readers. But we expect an editorial
of the Guardian to present facts in a sober and judicious manner to
help readers to understand the issues involved. Melodramatic and emotive
language used here hides the facts more than it enlightens. All acts of
violence, killings, desecration or provocation in a place of worship
are reprehensible. We all readily agree on this. What the two killers
did at Bar Nof synagogue was a crime.

At the same time we should also keep in mind what the Israeli
authorities and righting Jews have been doing for quite some time at
Al-Aqsa Mosque are also crimes and incessant provocations. In fact, the
Israeli state and Zionist provocateurs bear the full responsibility for
their criminal actions surrounding at Al-Aqsa Mosque for the last few
weeks while such provocations by Israeli leaders have a long history. No
wonder if such actions lead to their anticipated or unexpected fallout.
The killings at the synagogue and the desecration of Al-Aqsa Mosque are
not isolated incidents; they are interrelated. Obviously, it does not
suit hasbara to admit any such connection.

The editor writes, “Attacks like this were precisely what the
creation of the state of Israel was meant to prevent. Israel was to be
the one place in the world where Jews could pray in peace and safety.
Synagogues in London, Paris or New York have grown used to having a
security presence on the door. Now there are calls for the same
precaution to be taken in Israel, a bleak thought for a country
established to be a safe haven.” Here the whole narrative becomes
untenable in the light of history. The state of Israel was not created,
as the editor asserts, to provide a country to Jews where they could
pray in “peace and safety”.

The British imperialists laid the foundations for such a state in
1914 many years before the Nazis under Hitler gained political power in
Germany. After the Balfour Declaration in 1917, the plans for the
expropriation of the Palestinian people of their land were in place.
During the inter-war period, the growing Jewish migration to Palestine
and subsequently at the end of the Second World War, the Zionist
terrorist organisations in Palestine lost no time to force the British
as the mandatory (colonial) power to run back to the British isles.
Now the Zionists were in full control. This was the creation of Israel
and the start of the process of the Zionist colonisation and ethnic
cleansing of Palestine.

What started in 1948 is still going on. The West Bank has gradually
been devoured by Israeli settlements and in East Jerusalem the pace of
settlements has increased. Whereas the Gaza strip remains a virtual
concentration camp. After the 51-day Israeli war on Gaza, the Zionists
have devastated Gaza from which it may take years to recover. Moreover,
it is Israel that tells PA President what to do or not to do. Living
under Israeli occupation, he has few options. He is a nominal figure
operating under a colonial power. As a result he conforms to Tel Aviv’s
edicts.

Obviously, the creation of Israel was not to provide a safe place of
worship to the Jewish believers. In fact, there was no restriction on
Jews going to their synagogues. That was so in Europe, Asia and America.
The present-day safety measures in the synagogues of London, Paris or
New York, as the editor erroneously explains, are not due to any
inherent hatred against the Jews but rather due to the genocidal
policies of the state of Israel and its brutal oppression of the
Palestinians.

The editor pushes his/her line of thinking even further and along the
same lines as before and comes up with an explanation that many
observers may find amusing: “By attacking men as they pray – not, it is
worth stressing. In the occupied West Bank or in annexed East Jerusalem
but inside the boundaries of pre-1967 Israel proper – . . .” No one from
Israeli ruling class has ever defined where Israel’s borders and
boundaries lie or would lie. To have done so would have meant to forego
the Zionist objective of creating Greater Israel. Consequently, the
easiest thing to do was better served by keeping the question of
‘Israel’s borders’ a matter in the grey zone, where nothing was definite
and all was subject to change as the chances arose.